Trial Discussion Thread #31

[Gbtaketwo]

that does seem very strange.

looking at the motor boat incident [day/night][high water]
tasha's gun
the fans
the window slamming
the door slamming

it is almost like he has a total aversion for the truth. or believes the best way to disguise his story, is to swap everything.

it has also crossed my mind that there is a certain cruel pleasure, in making up the most ridiculous defence story, and then sitting there watching all the police running around him trying to fathom it out*.

*a bit like some of the tasks set on here, along the lines of "well, that didn't happen - go away, look through 40 hours of youtube video of vermeulen [et al] and show me the answers".

Was it James 83 or yourself that said that earlier today about swapping things round .It certainly seems to be the case with some things .

 

[Carmelita]

Reeva was not completely exsangiunated, the way let's say cattle is after certain religious slaughter. She suffered severe blood loss. She was a petite woman, lets say she had about 4.5 L of blood volume, so losing 25-30% from her limb injuries would mean you only need 1.5 L of blood on the floor. I don't think the pictures are inconsistent with such an amount.

Muscle/heart, organs, skin etc would be pale because the blood left in her body doesn't perfuse them. When you are seriously bleeding your body preferentially shunts blood to your head/brain and heart to promote survival. Other organs get minimal perfusion. You still have blood flow through major arteries to the limbs, until time after her brain injury when the process of death started and her vasomotor center either immediately or eventually would have been compromised. Without knowing what part of the brain was destroyed we can't speculate the time involved. Any residual cardiac activity( which I believe she had) is weak but you could still get spurting from her injured artery in the arm. I don't know if a major artery was transected or partially torn in the hip.


NOW I will bring up bleeding into tissues which is not what is classically referred to as "internal bleeding." A good example of internal bleeding is a GI ulcer eroding a vessel in your abdomen, and you are bleeding inside your body without the blood escaping out through a wound.

Bleeding into tissues DID occur at Reeva's wounds. You cut a rare steak and there is blood oozing from the many capillaries cut and the blood in the tissues. You are not cutting through a major artery in that steak and even though a lot of blood was removed during processing, it still oozes. Reeva had large wounds and while alive was losing blood through those even though the body tries to combat this by vasoconstricting and through any major vessels injured and to my knowledge the arm was the only one described.

Anywho, per Sorryl Skye's post you can see that in patients without a brain injury even the loss of 30% can be catastrophic but that is still only about 1.5 L.

I could go on but books could be written and have been on these matters.



I don't think there is that much if any "missing" blood.

Thank you! Although reading your answer did make me a bit queasy.

The bit about capillaries in a rare steak is a good graphic example, one that makes me happy to be a vegetarian.

 

[crasshopper]

Oscar's dogs seem to be rather docile, there is more than one picture of the outside of Oscars's house and the dogs are in the picture seemingly not bothered by a stranger being in their yard.


Just an observation.

Oscar may have taken his dog's to the gun range or on shooting watermelon excursions leaving them in the car or nearby.

They could be accustomed to gunfire?! Just a thought.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Oscar may have atken his dog's to the gun range or on shooting watermelon excursions leaving them in the car or nearby.

They could be accustomed to gunfire?! Just a thought.

Yes that is a good point . A bit like gun dogs trained to go on shoots.

 

[Carmelita]

that last sentence is indeed harrowing if true.

just a 'imo' comment about the locked bedroom door [with cricket bat across it]... this is still within 'op versioning'. it wasn't found locked, indeed quite the opposite, it was found damaged.

also as the alarm didn't sound at any time, and op can't remember / 'did the wooly thinking stunt' about activating/de-activating - it was probably never set. again imo.

The bedroom door was unlocked and the cricket bat removed by Oscar that is a simple reasonable assumption nothing inconsistent or odd about it. No one thinks Oscar and Reeva were locked in the bedroom with the cricket back lodged against the door when people started to arrive, no one has ever even implied that scenario.

 

[james83]

Reeva was not completely exsangiunated, the way let's say cattle is after certain religious slaughter. She suffered severe blood loss. She was a petite woman, lets say she had about 4.5 L of blood volume, so losing 25-30% from her limb injuries would mean you only need 1.5 L of blood on the floor. I don't think the pictures are inconsistent with such an amount.

Muscle/heart, organs, skin etc would be pale because the blood left in her body doesn't perfuse them. When you are seriously bleeding your body preferentially shunts blood to your head/brain and heart to promote survival. Other organs get minimal perfusion. You still have blood flow through major arteries to the limbs, until time after her brain injury when the process of death started and her vasomotor center either immediately or eventually would have been compromised. Without knowing what part of the brain was destroyed we can't speculate the time involved. Any residual cardiac activity( which I believe she had) is weak but you could still get spurting from her injured artery in the arm. I don't know if a major artery was transected or partially torn in the hip.


NOW I will bring up bleeding into tissues which is not what is classically referred to as "internal bleeding." A good example of internal bleeding is a GI ulcer eroding a vessel in your abdomen, and you are bleeding inside your body without the blood escaping out through a wound.

Bleeding into tissues DID occur at Reeva's wounds. You cut a rare steak and there is blood oozing from the many capillaries cut and the blood in the tissues. You are not cutting through a major artery in that steak and even though a lot of blood was removed during processing, it still oozes. Reeva had large wounds and while alive was losing blood through those even though the body tries to combat this by vasoconstricting and through any major vessels injured and to my knowledge the arm was the only one described.

Anywho, per Sorryl Skye's post you can see that in patients without a brain injury even the loss of 30% can be catastrophic but that is still only about 1.5 L.

I could go on but books could be written and have been on these matters.



I don't think there is that much if any "missing" blood.

Think i'll be having my steak well done from now on.

 

[Viper]

Reeva was not completely exsangiunated, the way let's say cattle is after certain religious slaughter. She suffered severe blood loss. She was a petite woman, lets say she had about 4.5 L of blood volume, so losing 25-30% from her limb injuries would mean you only need 1.5 L of blood on the floor. I don't think the pictures are inconsistent with such an amount.

Muscle/heart, organs, skin etc would be pale because the blood left in her body doesn't perfuse them. When you are seriously bleeding your body preferentially shunts blood to your head/brain and heart to promote survival. Other organs get minimal perfusion. You still have blood flow through major arteries to the limbs, until time after her brain injury when the process of death started and her vasomotor center either immediately or eventually would have been compromised. Without knowing what part of the brain was destroyed we can't speculate the time involved. Any residual cardiac activity( which I believe she had) is weak but you could still get spurting from her injured artery in the arm. I don't know if a major artery was transected or partially torn in the hip.


NOW I will bring up bleeding into tissues which is not what is classically referred to as "internal bleeding." A good example of internal bleeding is a GI ulcer eroding a vessel in your abdomen, and you are bleeding inside your body without the blood escaping out through a wound.

Bleeding into tissues DID occur at Reeva's wounds. You cut a rare steak and there is blood oozing from the many capillaries cut and the blood in the tissues. You are not cutting through a major artery in that steak and even though a lot of blood was removed during processing, it still oozes. Reeva had large wounds and while alive was losing blood through those even though the body tries to combat this by vasoconstricting and through any major vessels injured and to my knowledge the arm was the only one described.

Anywho, per Sorryl Skye's post you can see that in patients without a brain injury even the loss of 30% can be catastrophic but that is still only about 1.5 L.

I could go on but books could be written and have been on these matters.



I don't think there is that much if any "missing" blood.

Whoa! I just saw your post! Didnt you post earlier on this thread that you never said Reeva bled to death? I'll have to go check that later when I have time.

Since we have Reeva's cause of death, gunshot wounds, is it appropriate to speculate that she died of some other cause? Especially that she died over a period of 10 minutes; I have not heard any evidence to suggest that, none at all.

It is fun to speculate and I would never take away a person's speculation of what happened that night, but as evidence is presented certain opportunities to speculate close. Are you now expecting another DT pathologist to testify that Reeva did not die within seconds of gunshot wounds, but instead she bled out over a period of 10 minutes (27 minutes DT version)?

And in my eyes there is not 1.5 - 2 liters of blood in that bathroom, there just isn't.

Ah, will chat more later, I have to run.

 

[sorrell skye]

The holster that was found in the drawer of the nightstand on the right hand side of the bed wasn't a gun holster - it was described as being an ammunition holster or pouch for the extra clip.

Only one gun holster was found - on the nightstand on the left hand side of the bed.

 

[minor4th]

I only started following this right before the trial started, and I read a few articles and thought the state is going to have a really hard time proving premeditation and murder -- but of course there was not much information out at the time. Here's my progression of how I have swayed from "not guilty" to "definitely guilty" to "not guilty" to "I don't know:

Burger

Then the state put on their first witness -Burger and I thought "That's it. He's so guilty; his goose is cooked." But then Roux poked some pretty significant holes in her account when he compared it to her prior written statement, and she was so stubbornly resistant to conceding even reasonable points, that I began to wonder if she was maybe a little too gung ho for the prosecution. She stated that she thought OP was lying and by implication guilty, so I wondered if she was(perhaps even unintentionally) framing her testimony in biased manner (adding embellishments about the screams, adding the detail that she heard a man and woman screaming at the same time, etc).

At that time, Roux was merely suggesting that the shots she heard might have been the cricket bat hitting the door - a suggestion that I initially dismissed out of hand, as I could not conceive that the two could sound the same or even similar enough to be confused.

Johnson

Then Johnson also seemed compelling and believable when Nel was questioning him. But again Roux cast doubt on his testimony as well - he changed the number of shots he heard from his initial statements, changed his description of the screams, and also added a man and woman screaming or yelling at the same time.

So at that point, I have some doubts about their testimony -- not their whole testimony, but certain parts that were changed from their initial statements. Johnson was more credible to me simply because he at least seemed willing to consider that he misinterpreted the sounds or the screams.

Van der Merwe

Then Van der Merwe got on the stand and we hear that she heard "loud talking" by a female on and off from 2-3 and then 4 bangs around 3:00. That seemed to corroborate some of the Burger/Johnson testimony and also added the implication of an argument between OP and Reeva leading up to the gunshots. At that point, we have no point of reference for the two sets of sounds, so it seems like Merwe is describing the same shots the Burgers heard. But then she says she mistook OP's loud crying for the sounds of a female. Hmmm. I started to wonder if it's possible OP's screams really did sound like a woman ...at least it now seems possible.

Merwe's testimony is a bit confusing because of the translation issues IMO but listening closely it's clear that she does not know where the "loud talking" was coming from and she didn't hear the other side, so it's not clear that it was even an argument (maybe one side of a phone call argument?)

Dr Stipp

Dr Stipp's testimony was crucial because it gave context to the two sets of sounds and for the first time we hear from an actual witness that the gunshots and cricket bat both sounded like gunshots - and that those sounds were separated by several minutes.

He was also on the scene within minutes and can give a direct description of Oscar's appearance and demeanor as well as Reeva's condition

He says he sees the light on after the shots and about the time the screaming started - "several moments" after the 3 shots he heard, as he described it. On the face of it, this is at least consistent with OP's own account.

Vermeulen and Mangena

Together these two experts testify that the gunshots were before the bat strikes, OP was on his stumps when he shot through the door, and OP was standing at a farther distance and at an angle from the door when he shot through it.

I know there are disagreements about what they really meant, but IMO this was the substance of their testimony.

Mrs Stipp

She also heard two sets of noises several minutes apart and also believed both sounds were gunshots - they sounded the same. She says she hears man and woman screaming - but there's still that doubt in my mind because of Merwe's misidentification of female/male loud crying. Taken together with the expert testimony, it at least seems possible that it could have been Oscar crying/screaming/yelling because the forensics suggest that Reeva would have been incapacitated. (I know, I know, most of you disagree, but I'm just laying out my thinking and the evolution of my opinion)

Phone/Data Guy

Messages indicated that there were some problems and this probably wasn't the most healthy relationship, but there were also many messages that indicated that the two were very fond of each other and still in the grip of a new romantic relationship.

The messages also indicated that Oscar was not jealous about Reeva visiting her ex-bf soon before the incident. That was a big deal to me. While there did seem to be some petty jealousy on Oscar's part (Reeva talking to some guy when Oscar was ready to leave and touching his arm, etc), there's nothing at all to indicate that he was consumed with jealousy or that he acted out violently as a result.

So by the conclusion of the state's case, in my mind there is already reasonable doubt about whether the witnesses heard Reeva screaming between the two sets of loud bangs. And if there's reasonable doubt about Reeva screaming and no clear jealousy motive, then there's really no case for premeditation.

Oscar Pistorius

I believed that it would be somewhat smooth sailing for OP after the state finished its case in chief, but OP has proved to be a horrible witness. Not only is he a bad witness, who IMO is easily confused and easily led - his defense was undermined by his use of "accident" and his (obvious IMO) refusal to ever use the words "intent" or "deliberate" even though that's what he was describing. It just confused everything.

Then Nel brings these pictures back out that would really obliterate Oscar's account if we could confidently accept that they were actually depictions of the crime scene as the police initially found it (untouched).

OP also made some mistakes that are concerning - I can't recall exactly what they were but there were a couple that really made me question whether he's hiding something.

Other issues of concern: The food in Reeva's stomach and what appears to be an improbability that her last meal was at 7:30 as Oscar reports. Another issue is the addition of the assertion that Reeva was awake and talking to him as he was getting the fans. Another issue - the whole layout of their bedroom and all the maneuvers OP would have had to go through to get from the point of first hearing the sound in the bathroom until the point that he is at the corner of the bathroom with his gun pointed at the toilet.

At this point, I am keeping an open mind and I'm anxious to hear more evidence that might instill a more abiding conclusion in my mind.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

The holster that was found in the drawer of the nightstand on the right hand side of the bed wasn't a gun holster - it was described as being an ammunition holster or pouch for the extra clip.

Only one gun holster was found - on the nightstand on the left hand side of the bed.

Thanks for that I knew that there was also an ammunition holder but was confused because I have read in the WS forum that he had two gun holsters .
Someone said something along the lines that he uses a different depending on what he is wearing

Do you know if that is correct and where the other one was in the house ?
TIA

 

[lisasalinger]

I was just looking at some of the photos at her blog. While I'm terrible at distances and need new glasses, I was noticing the distance from the balcony to the bathroom. Wouldn't said intruder/s have to really slam the window really HARD for it to be heard all the way through the bathroom, bathroom hallway, hallway/passageway across bedroom to OP ears ( fan on ?? ) Does it just appear a long way away to hear a window slamming? Although I do not believe a intruder could/did get up there without a ladder nor would they slam a window, or run to the bathroom. How many feet, bathroom/toilet (in US toilet room is the bathroom) to balcony?

BBM... you qualify to be on the defense team! :giggle: (just teasing)

OP added the "heard window slide open" detail to his plea statement prior to court. It was not in his bail affidavit.

When OP was on the stand, part of his reasoning for not asking Reeva if she heard the noise was because he said he KNEW exactly what he heard, he didn't need confirmation.

When Nel pushed him on how he KNEW what he heard was the window, he masterfully tailored in the window hitting its wooden frame... you could see the wheels churning in his mind as he said it. Yea, that's right, Nel... I heard wood slam on wood and that totally means that the window opened and I heard it. If I could read minds, I bet at that point he was thinking "man, I'm brilliant."

The funny thing is, he previously had stated that when he entered the bathroom, "seeing" the window open is what confirmed it for him.

Oops.

 

[minor4th]

A lot of FM have thoughts about that . But I just don't like to think about as it is just too horrible to think about .
( meaning here he might never have been brought to court )

What does "FM" mean? :blushing:

 

[minor4th]

BBM

Your bolded part - he denied doing that. He claims he fired those shots off without any control or thought process whatsoever. So right there it means you admit he was lying.

Why does somebody aim when they are shooting? Because they want to hit their target.

Why do they want to hit their target 4 times? Because they want to kill them.

Now add in who he wanted to kill. Based on the totality of his evidence about the events leading up to the shots, in my mind, it's IMPOSSIBLE that he didn't know Reeva was in there. His lies tell the story quite beautifully.

Reeva was standing facing that door, pleading with OP to stop. Screaming blood-curdling screams that the neighbors heard quite clearly.

I know he denied it - but he's denying doing anything intentionally. I'm saying it looks to me like he was shooting towards the person's core more or less.

And yes, IMO he was shooting to kill. I still think he believed it was an intruder, but I'm not 100% convinced

 

[Carmelita]

Whoa! I just saw your post! Didnt you post earlier on this thread that you never said Reeva bled to death? I'll have to go check that later when I have time.

Since we have Reeva's cause of death, gunshot wounds, is it appropriate to speculate that she died of some other cause? Especially that she died over a period of 10 minutes; I have not heard any evidence to suggest that, none at all.

It is fun to speculate and I would never take away a person's speculation of what happened that night, but as evidence is presented certain opportunities to speculate close. Are you now expecting another DT pathologist to testify that Reeva did not die within seconds of gunshot wounds, but instead she bled out over a period of 10 minutes (27 minutes DT version)?

And in my eyes there is not 1.5 - 2 liters of blood in that bathroom, there just isn't.

Ah, will chat more later, I have to run.

Brain dead does not always mean that the heart has stopped beating.


http://www.transplant.bc.ca/brain_criterion_main.htm

Q. If my loved one is brain dead, what does that mean?

A. When someone is brain dead, it means there is not blood flow or oxygen to their brain and that their brain is no longer functioning in any capacity and never will again. It does not mean that other organs, such as the heart, kidneys or liver, are dead, although they may function for only a few days. Unless damaged by injury or disease, these organs may be used by another individual through an organ transplant.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

What does "FM" mean? :blushing:

Forum Member . I had to ask myself a while back

 

[sleuth-d-]

Was it James 83 or yourself that said that earlier today about swapping things round .It certainly seems to be the case with some things .

think it was james, i think he called it 'op's razor'. although i have mentioned op's narcissism* and pathological lying a few times previously


*Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.

 

[Mr Fossil]

It's my understanding the prosecution has to give the defense everything the prosecution intends on using, whereas the defense is able to keep everything they intend to use, up their sleeve.



All BBM

Correct me if I'm wrong (anyone), I recall (can't remember from where, sorry), someone, somewhere saying Reeva's top was on backwards. Now, I don't know if this meant back on front, inside out or both.

I don't think this is the case. The pic of the vest clearly shows the label of the vest on the inside back with the vest damage to the front (Reeva's right side).

 

[jay-jay]

BBM... you qualify to be on the defense team! :giggle: (just teasing)

OP added the "heard window slide open" detail to his plea statement prior to court. It was not in his bail affidavit.

When OP was on the stand, part of his reasoning for not asking Reeva if she heard the noise was because he said he KNEW exactly what he heard, he didn't need confirmation.

When Nel pushed him on how he KNEW what he heard was the window, he masterfully tailored in the window hitting its wooden frame... you could see the wheels churning in his mind as he said it. Yea, that's right, Nel... I heard wood slam on wood and that totally means that the window opened and I heard it. If I could read minds, I bet at that point he was thinking "man, I'm brilliant."

The funny thing is, he previously had stated that when he entered the bathroom, "seeing" the window open is what confirmed it for him.

Oops.

Right on the button there, I reckon ..

 

[Carmelita]

think it was james, i think he called it 'op's razor'. although i have mentioned op's narcissism* and pathological lying a few times previously


*Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.

Yes it was James and it was a play on words referring to Occam’s razor.

 

[sleuth-d-]

The bedroom door was unlocked and the cricket bat removed by Oscar that is a simple reasonable assumption nothing inconsistent or odd about it. No one thinks Oscar and Reeva were locked in the bedroom with the cricket back lodged against the door when people started to arrive, no one has ever even implied that scenario.

i didn't imply that either, i am sorry if you misinterpreted my comment. i was merely stating that the door was only ever locked according to the op version of events. it may not have been locked at all during the evening.

how do you know the bedroom door was unlocked by op? how do you know the cricket bat was 'double locking the bedroom door'?